Hey, I know I have been slow to review things but I wonder if we could keep things open for a bit longer than a day? This was added originally to support browsers and we probably should have had a browser compatibility support listed somewhere and ideally tested, but it was a long time ago and I don't remember the discussions from back then. But to me this should have been considered a breaking change unless we were also going to consider 2.x having dropped browser supports. If we want that (which I think is a good idea) then we should also document this change as if it was part of what we dropped in 2.x.

EDIT: for clarity, I dont mean we should back this out necessarily. Just that if we are saying we no longer support those old browsers we should document that as the intended behavior for 2.x entirely like we dropped node <18 even though the tests still passed in older nodes.

EDIT 2: #14

This is interesting, we decided not to get the tests working and "advertise" browser support despite it being fully functional in the browsers at the time (and I am pretty sure it still is although I haven't used it that way in a few years). This is more of a meta question for how we want to manage support for browsers when the code can be used in them. Either way, I think before we release this we should decide on an approach and document it clearly so we don't break someone who was doing something a little unexpected but perfectly "valid" as a use case.